Side comment: ± should probably be allowed as a unary operator.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Kaj Wiik wrote:
> To wrap this item up, it would be good to know where the distinction
> (parsing) is done in sources?
>
> Thanks,
> Kaj
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:03:09 PM UTC+3, Steven
To wrap this item up, it would be good to know where the distinction
(parsing) is done in sources?
Thanks,
Kaj
On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:03:09 PM UTC+3, Steven G. Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 2:34:00 PM UTC+1, Kaj Wiik wrote:
>>
>> Yes, it is probably a binary ope
On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 2:34:00 PM UTC+1, Kaj Wiik wrote:
>
> Yes, it is probably a binary operator but searches fail to find it.
>
Certain symbols are parsed as operators, and others are parsed as
identifiers. This is independent of whether that symbol is defined in Base.
For example
Yes, it is probably a binary operator but searches fail to find it.
Any use would also clash with Measurements.jl, so it'd be a bad idea anyway
:-).
Thanks,
Kaj
On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 4:02:57 PM UTC+3, David van Leeuwen wrote:
>
> It probably is defined as an operator, but without defin
It probably is defined as an operator, but without definition.
julia> ±(a,b) = (a+b, a-b)
± (generic function with 1 method)
julia> 3±4
(7,-1)
your assignment probably overrides the default operator.
---david
On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 2:08:21 PM UTC+2, Kaj Wiik wrote:
>
>
> I have a
